Interregional Redistribution and Regional Disparities: How Equalization Does (Not) Work
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Do inter-governmental transfers such as equalization grants reduce interregional disparities? This paper studies both theoretically and empirically the impact of interregional redistribution on interregional inequality. We set up a model with residential choice and equalization grants between regions, and show that interregional transfer payments prevent convergence promoting migration. We test our model in using cross-country data and panel data for 22 highly developed OECD countries. The evidence suggests a positive relationship between interregional transfers and regional disparities both across countries and over time from 1982 to 2000. In the cross-section data, we find that countries with higher levels of interregional redistribution in the past show a subsequent increase in interregional disparity, while countries with lower levels of grants and transfers show less divergence or even convergence. The panel reveals a similar picture: countries who have increased their sub-governmental transfers and grants have experienced more divergence (less convergence) over time than countries who have lowered their transfers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it